Yeah. I have a copy of "The Berenstein Bears and the Of Course You'll Never Find a Nice Doctor to Marry if You Keep Wearing Your Hair Like That, I'm Saying -- You Want Me to Die Alone, I Worry Is All. And Would it Kill You to Call More, Maybe, Not That I'm Complaining."

PS: That almost ties into my theory that cute and/or intelligent animals taste better. Pigs are comparatively quite smart=>bacon, lambs are sooooo adorable and fuzzy, but oh so tasty in a nice curry, and I've only heard good things about the tastiness of bambis.

Not quite. Henson said they are not doing future deals with CFA. Henson did not say it is backing out of this deal. Rather, Henson is donating all profits from this deal to GLAAD. If CFA were to keep the deal, it would be indirectly supporting GLAAD. Hence, CFA concocted a story about potential safety concerns to cover CFA's decision to back out. I'm sure Henson was glad to let them out.

Not sure if defamation is the proper cause of action (FYI: "defamation" is the generic term that includes "slander" [spoken] and "libel" [written]). I'd bet Henson doesn't make the toys -- it merely licenses the use of Henson's names, likenesses, trademarks and other elements. Therefore, safety concerns would not be Henson's responsibility, and allegations about safety would not be directed toward Henson. On the other hand, this would damage Henson's reputation. I'd need to see the licensing agreement to know for sure.

Most likely, of course, Henson will just be happy to see them gone, and will not pursue any claims.

So, an evangelical Christian business. I mean, there's a phrase for that already.

(Note that individuals can be "evangelical Christians" just fine without detriment to society and I hold no judgement there. However, when a business is based on it things just tend to go to shit and people get hurt and offended as a matter of course. Like needing my chicken fix on a Sunday and resorting to McDonald's.)

When did opposition to same sex marriage equate to anti-homosexuality. I'm against same-sex marriage because I'm against marriage licenses, period. It's a holdover from when miscegeny laws were on the books. Marriage should have no implication or impact with your relationship to the government. It is a religious contract.

Sad thing is, if people want to share their benefits with their partner for example cause they are the one keeping the home and raising the kids, well unless you have that piece of paper you are shit outta luck.

Insurance that only covers "family members" and tax breaks given if you are a married unit. There have been many cases where one partner (homosexual and heterosexual) had the insurance but they could not use it on their partner because they were not married therefore not considered family by the company they worked for or the insurance company.

Again, this goes back to government sponsored discrimination. If marriage was purely a religious covenant or secular contract then these terrible exclusions would be eradicated to a large extent. Even heterosexual couples are screwed in the current system. If 20 years ago something terrible happened to my mom, my step dad who raised me and is my dad in every way except for a shared DNA, wouldn't be able to contest for parenting rights.

It's highly unlikely they bought the products from the Jim Henson Company and more likely they licensed them and contracted their manufacture through some manufacturing company. So if they defame the product, they're defaming their own implementation of the license and are pretty much safe.

I don't want to give them my business, but my kids (2,4&6) love going to Chick-Fil-A. We have been going there for years now because they are so family friendly at the local restaurant near us. How do I explain this to the kids?

I told my daughter who was probably 6 at the time that we would not be giving them any of our money because they give money to bad people who want to take away the rights of others. I explained to her that some men want to marry men and some women want to marry women and asked her to imagine how she would feel if she met the boy of her dreams someday but wasn't allowed to marry him. She was absolutely appalled. OF COURSE people should be allowed to marry whoever they want. She hasn't asked for Chickfilet since. Sometimes honesty is the best policy. :)

Sometimes your principles are more important than taking little kids to their first choice of fast food joints. I think my mom's explanation would've been along the lines of "because we're going to Long John Silver's instead" and left it at that.

Perhaps you're more interested in turning this into a teachable moment. In that case, consider something like "because they treat some people badly so we're going to go somewhere that doesn't" - sorry, don't know of one single explanation that would be age-appropriate for all ages 2, 4, and 6. You're the parent; it's up to you.

Heck, when I was a kid, my parents boycotted the local Blockbuster because they wouldn't refund a broken VHS. We went to the "Budget Video" down the street instead, and I spent a while watching lots of Blackstar and Beanie & Cecil videotapes. What was I gonna do, throw a tantrum? Besides, those cartoons were GREAT.

Belief is one thing and action another. If the beliefs were privately held, no one would ever know or particularly care. When those beliefs drive action, ensuring that money the company earns could potentially be used to disenfranchise and restrict the rights of other Americans, then people are more than entitled to vote with their wallet.

But, they don't give all their money to anti-gay marriage charites. They give a lot of money to charities such as ones that help terminally ill kids and schools. They also take a positive stance by introducing recycling at the store level and using environmental friendly techniques in building new stores, and retro-fitting old stores. they don't ban gay people from eating or working there.

Many companies deny people their constitutional right to carry state licensed concealed handguns. Reddit isn't in an uproar about that is it? (Well, I'd say most of reddit, with the exception of r/gunnit.)

I'm not anti-gay marriage or anything like that, if gays want to get married and be miserable like the rest of us, it doesn't affect me any. I'm just saying don't pick and choose what you boycott. Chick-fil-a isn't really discriminating against anyone. Like I said, they don't ban gays from eating or working at their restaurants. They support a political side. At least they stand up for something.

Gay marriage is something that our country is struggling with. It's a newish concept to a lot of people. Logical thinking people will agree that gay people have every right to marry, just like logical thinking people 50 years ago agreed that interracial couples had every right to marry. And just like we do now, 50 years from now we'll look back and see just how silly the same sex marriage debate was. However we're not there just yet.

My point is, they might give money to one organization that opposes same-sex marriage, but when you take all the other organizations they give to that don't have anti-gay messages, they might give more money to good charities than to an anti-gay one. In the end, it is a private company, and can do what they want with their money, just like you can do with your money. I just don't feel a bunch of people from the Internet boycotting Chick-fil-a is really going to make any difference.

FYI TO EVERYONE ELSE IN THIS THREAD. If you get in an argument with OP (my_spare_account) and he suddenly has a friend named digitalreck backing him up and apologising on Chick-Fil-A's behalf....that's because its the same person.

I saw something similar today on the door of a Chick-Fil-A north of San Antonio. The picture said that they were being voluntarily recalled due to potential of "children getting fingers stuck in holes"

Lying to customers about why there will be no more Muppets at Chick-Fil-A must be in the same category of "biblical values" for which they spend so much money lobbying congress, in yet another corrupt system.

There is a toll free number from chicks web site, 866.232.2040. After about a minute on hold, I spoke with a company rep who confirmed that yes, the toys are being recalled due to safety concerns, but he was unable to detail what those concerns may be. Make your own conclusion to this, but my opinion is there's a pissing match happening, one where the truth cannot be told. Or will not.

CFA claims this decision was made and their restaurants were informed of this on the 16th. Apparently there were a couple issues with the toys getting stuck on fingers and having to be cut off by medical professionals. Who knows, but it would serve us all well to try to find information regarding this, before we instantly jump to bigotry. There could actually be a safety issue here.

To donate money behind closed doors is one thing, but then he got called out on that and proceed to jump around, yell, and flick everyone off about how he doesn't like gay people in the name of God, himself, and his chicken. That is fucking reprehensible, and they need to know.

They hold morally deprived view points that they parade around as family "values" while donating money to further limit the rights of another group of people. This isn't about respecting one's beliefs or religion - they are being bigoted and I do not want my money to support their hate, regardless of how delicious their peanut oily chicken is.

If I give money to someone and that person uses the money to actively suppress the freedom of others, then I am partially responsible for suppressing the freedom of others. So, any time I find out that a portion of a company's money goes straight to a political organization that will suppress other people's rights (the AFA, NOM, etc.), I do my best to stop giving them money and let them know I'm doing this because of their monetary donations.

Oh, and to answer your question: Yes, I do believe that if a CEO/Owner doesn't agree with me politically/morally (and makes donations that are counter to my political/moral stance) they should be boycotted (at least by me) until they change their stance/go out of business. They have the freedom to do what they wish with their money, and I have the freedom to tell them my money won't become their money until they change their spending patterns.

Well yea, I guess I should have said almost all of reddit, with the exception of gunnittors. (I've been on /r/guns for a while, but don't participate too much. They seem a little too enthusiastic for me.)

Same Sex Marriage is essential for a healthy community of people who feel equal. If you ask me marriage is retarded from the get go, but keeping something like this from people, causing them pain, what's the point unless you're a dick.

Why do you use a fucking sockpuppet account to post one item showing how shit Chick-fil-a is, but another sockpuppet account to rustle the jimmies of someone else who'd like to uncover another item showing how shit Chick-fil-a is? Can't handle someone finding out new info in YOUR thread? What a shitball you are.

digitalreck=my_spare_account for anyone playing along. How many other threads and posts do you do this in?

My point is, they are bragging about only working 4 days a week. Without confirmation that they are still getting 40 hours a week, that is basically admitting that Chick-fil-a is limiting their workforce to only part-time employment, which allows corporate to keep the majority of their workforce off the benefit rolls.

have you ever had a job before? nearly every company that ever existed hires both full-time and part-time employees. maybe that poster is in high school or college and only has time for a part-time job. just because a company has employees that work less than 40 hours, it doesn't instantly mean that they're out to fuck over their staff and not offer them benefits. offering part-time employment is generally beneficial for the company, as well as people who are not able to work 40 full hours every week.

Yes, I've worked to support myself since I was 17, so that's 13 years of employment. THATS WHY I'VE ASKED THE POSTER HOW MANY HOURS THEY WORK. I'd like to see if the whole only working 4 days a week thing is a ploy by chick-fil-a to completely avoid paying benefits to full time employees.

Apparently you're one of these people who probably digs that companies like Wal-mart are so forward thinking as to fuck over 95% of their workforce.

Why would you brag about having 3 days a week off in this economy, or at all if you're part time? A lot of fast food workers are in fact full time and recieve benefits. Hell, they even pay for school at really good places like In-n-out.

Feel free to post your own pictures, but please read the rules first (see below), and note that we are not a catch-all for general images (of screenshots, comics, etc.)

r/pics Rules

1.

R1: No screenshots. No added text/emoji/scribbles.

(1A) No screenshots or pictures of screens.

(1B) No pictures with added/superimposed digital text, emojis, and "MS Paint"-like scribbles. Exceptions to this rule include watermarks serving to credit the original author, and blurring/boxing out of personal information. "Photoshopped", or otherwise manipulated images are allowed.

2.

R2: No porn or gore.

No porn or gore. Artistic nudity is allowed. NSFW comments must be tagged. Posting gratuitous materials may result in an immediate and permanent ban.

3.

R3: no personal information / missing persons

No personal information / No missing-persons requests. Do not witch hunt.

Submissions must link directly to a specific image file or to a website with minimal ads. We do not allow blog hosting of images ("blogspam"), but links to albums on image hosting websites are okay. Ads in album titles or descriptions are not allowed.

6.

R6: no animated image posts

No animated images, no youtube links. This applies to all file types. Animated images in comments are fine.

7.

R7: Civility

We enforce a standard of common decency and civility here. Please be respectful to others. Personal attacks, bigotry, fighting words, otherwise inappropriate behavior or content, comments that insult or demean a specific user or group of users will be removed. Regular or egregious violations will result in a ban.